Increased spinal height using propped slouched sitting postures: Innovative ways to rehydrate intervertebral discs

Pape, J.; Brismée, Jean‐Michel; Sizer, Phillip S.; Matthijs, Omer; Browne, Kevin L.; Dewan, Birendra M.; Sobczak, Stéphane

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2017.07.016

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In upright sitting, stress both from body mass and gravity reduces disc height and therefore decreases body stature, termed 'stature loss' [16][17][18]. Stature recovery is the process of restoring disc height, possible because the disc has the ability to absorb fluid during periods of unloading the spine, in which the osmotic pressure within the disc is greater than the hydrostatic pressure from compressive loading [16,17,19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Time of Day on the Magnitude of Stature Change Response Variability in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain on Consecutive 2 Days

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurements of stature change have been used to compare spinal loading in the sitting posture. However, it is difficult to interpret whether the stature change response recorded is truly due to an intervention or to the natural fluctuation of stature change response between the days. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of time of day (morning and afternoon) on the variability of stature change in participants with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on 2 consecutive days. Forty-four participants with CLBP attended 2 sessions (morning and afternoon) of stature change testing on 4 separate days. A stature change response of more than 0.985 mm in the morning and 1.149 mm in the afternoon on 2 consecutive days indicates that an intervention itself has influenced stature change measurement in CLBP participants. The magnitude of stature change response on different days and times of day established specific levels of natural variation meaning changes above these levels can be attributed to intervention effects in participants with CLBP. HIGHLIGHTS The findings suggest that it is important to control the time at which stature change investigations are conducted Seated stadiometry measurement, changes above 0.985 mm (morning) and 1.149 mm (afternoon) can be attributed to intervention effects between consecutive 2 days The results of the current study presented no significant difference in magnitude of stature change response in the morning versus the afternoon in chronic low back pain participants GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Time of Day on the Magnitude of Stature Change Response Variability in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain on Consecutive 2 Days

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During prolonged sitting, forces from bodyweight cause deformation of the elastic components of the disc and increased intra-discal pressure [50,51]. Fluid loss is known to occur when the pressure inside the disc increases and can be indicated as the major mechanism to account for the reduction in disc height and consequent stature loss [52,53]. Prolonged sitting in CLBP participants induced stature loss (mean difference −7.365 mm) at 41 min (T 3 ) (Table 2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Core Stabilization Exercise with the Abdominal Drawing-in Maneuver Technique on Stature Change during Prolonged Sitting in Sedentary Workers with Chronic Low Back Pain

Saiklang

Puntumetakul

Chatprem

2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To enhance stature recovery, lumbar spine stabilization by stimulating the deep trunk muscle activation for compensation forces originating from the upper body was introduced. The abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM) technique has been found mainly to activate deep trunk muscles. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether 5 weeks of training of deep trunk muscles using the ADIM technique could improve stature recovery, delay trunk muscle fatigue, and decrease pain intensity during prolonged sitting. Thirty participants with chronic low back pain (CLBP) conducted a core stabilization exercise (CSE) with the ADIM technique for 5 weeks. Participants were required to sit for 41 min before and after the exercise intervention. Stature change was measured using a seated stadiometer with a resolution of ±0.006 mm. During sitting, the stature change, pain intensity, and trunk muscle fatigue were recorded. A comparison between measurements at baseline and after 5 weeks of training demonstrated: (i) stature recovery and pain intensity significantly improved throughout the 41 min sitting condition; (ii) the bilaterally trunk muscle showed significantly decreased fatigue. The CSE with the ADIM technique was shown to provide a protective effect on detrimental reductions in stature change and trunk muscle fatigue during prolonged sitting in young participants under controlled conditions in a laboratory. This information may help to prevent the risk of LBP from prolonged sitting activities in real life situations.

show abstract

“…The listed prospective studies ([1,6,8,11,14,17-19], Table 1) and review articles ( [12,13,15,16,24,26,27], Table 2) demonstrated no positive effect. An effect was described in three biomechanical studies ( [3,4,7], Table 1) and one postoperative study [21].…”

Section: Overview Of the Current Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

An Indication-Based Concept for Stepwise Spinal Orthosis in Low Back Pain According to the Current Literature

Landauer

Trieb

2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The current literature is not conclusive for spinal orthosis treatment in low back pain. Therefore, two questions have to be answered: Does the current literature support the indication of spinal orthosis treatment in low back pain? Which treatment concept can be derived from the result? Method: The 30 highest-rated literature citations (PubMed: best match, 30 December 2021) dealing with low back pain and spine orthosis were included in the study. Excluded were all articles related to Kinesio Taping, scoliosis, physical exercise, or dealing with side effects and unrelated to treatment effect. Thus, the literature list refers only to “low back pain and spine orthoses”. These articles were analyzed according to the PRISMA criteria and divided according to “specific diagnosis”, when the cause of pain was explained (group A), or when “specific diagnosis is not given” (group B). The articles were also distinguished by the information about the orthosis. Articles with biomechanical information about the function of the orthoses were called “diagnosis-based orthosis” (group C). All other articles were part of the group “unspecific orthotic treatment” (group D). The results were compared to each other in terms of effectiveness. According to anatomical causes, a concept of orthosis selection depending on diagnosis of low back pain for clinical practice was developed. The risk of bias lies in the choice of the MESH terms. The synthesis of the results was a clinical treatment concept based on findings from the current literature. Results: The literature citations with 1749 patients and 2160 citations of literature were processed; 21 prospective clinical or biomechanical studies and 9 review articles were included. The combination of literature citations according to “specific diagnosis” (group A) and “diagnosis based orthosis” (group C) was very likely to lead to a therapeutic effect (seven articles). No positive effect could be found in four articles, all dealing with postoperative treatment. When “specific diagnosis is not given” (group B) and combined with “unspecific orthotic treatment” (group D), therapy remained without measurable effect (15 articles). An effect was described in four articles (three biomechanical studies and one postoperative study). In review articles, according to specific diagnosis, only one article dealt with fractures and another with stenosis. In all review articles where specific diagnosis was not given, no effect with spine orthoses could be found. Using this knowledge, we created a clinical treatment concept. The structure was based on diagnosis and standardized orthoses. According to pain location and pathology (muscle, intervertebral disc, bone, statics, postoperative) the orthoses were classified to anatomical extent and the mechanical limitation (bandage, bodice, corset, orthosis with shoulder straps and erecting orthosis). Conclusion: The effectiveness of spinal orthoses could not be deduced from the current literature. The most serious limitation was the inconsistency of the complaint and the imprecise designation of the orthoses. Interpretation: Articles with a precise allocation of the complaint and a description of the orthosis showed a positive effect. The treatment concept presented here is intended to provide a basis for answering the question concerning the effectiveness of spinal orthoses as an accompanying treatment option in low back pain.

show abstract

Increased spinal height using propped slouched sitting postures: Innovative ways to rehydrate intervertebral discs

Cited by 17 publications

References 47 publications

Effect of Time of Day on the Magnitude of Stature Change Response Variability in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain on Consecutive 2 Days

Effect of Time of Day on the Magnitude of Stature Change Response Variability in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain on Consecutive 2 Days

The Effect of Core Stabilization Exercise with the Abdominal Drawing-in Maneuver Technique on Stature Change during Prolonged Sitting in Sedentary Workers with Chronic Low Back Pain

An Indication-Based Concept for Stepwise Spinal Orthosis in Low Back Pain According to the Current Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About